HomeMy WebLinkAboutWESTBROOKE PUD FIRST FILING FINAL - 3 90D - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSServices
Planning Department
July 29, 1991
Linda Hopkins
37.5 East Horsetooth Road
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
Dear Linda,
City staff has reviewed your submittal for WESTBROORB FIRST FILING,
Final P.U.D., and offers the following comments:
1. Plat requirements:
a) Needs standard legal description and dedication statement
language for the First Filing.
b) Need to dedicate the temporary emergency access and cul-
de-sac between Westbrooke Drive and Seneca Street.
c) R.O.W. widths for all streets must be shown.
d) Sight distance easements may be required at the
intersection of Westbrooke Drive and Westbrooke Court.
e) Need monumentation/closure, Point of Beginning, and
primary control ties shown.
f) utility easement widths must be shown. Generally, a 15'
easement is required along Seneca Street (being a
collector),, 8' easements on all front lot lines along
local streets and 6' easements on all rear lot lines are
required.
g) A Sandcreek Drive exists in the Evergreen Park area in
Fort Collins. Sand Creek Court should be renamed to avoid
confusion related to emergency response time.
h) The north arrow is pointing almost due east.
i) Identify all drainage easements and tracts and label them
for clarification.
The subdivision plat is still lacking quite of bit of information
to bring it up to an acceptable level for Final review. Please
contact Wally Muscott at 221-6605 or Kerrie Ashbeck at 221-6750
with any questions concerning the plat.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750
1
2. Site & Landscape Plan requirements:
✓a)/ Sand Creek Court should be _renamed to be consistent with
plat (when revised).
/ b) i All street and R.O.W. widths must be shown.
c)/ Utility easements, drainage easements and tracts (to
include proposed facilities) with their associated
widths/dimensions must be shown.
d) / The temporary emergency access and cul-de-sac must be
shown in detail and dimensioned. It is important to show
the adjacent lots in Filing Two to give an overall
picture of how these areas will interact and function.
e) / Adjoining properties and associated uses in all
directions must be shown.
/f) / The Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal easement width should be
shown in its entirety. Also, show at least the
approximate centerline of the ditch and the alignment of
the proposed City trail corridor along the ditch (from
the Parks & Recreation Master Plan).
g) The crosswalk at the intersection of Seneca Street and
Regency Drive, for pedestrian access to the schools, and
6 the proposed connection to the east to the trail corridor
should be shown.
,,,-'h) An access easement and/or R.O.W. for the Pleasant Valley
& Lake Canal must be provided.
General Note 7 should read.: Connection to, the ,proposed
City trail system.....
j A general note should be added to this plan stating who
will maintain any landscaping in the public R.O.W. on
Seneca Street. If landscaping is proposed in the parkway
and the individual homeowners will be responsible, then
it must be noted that walk-through gates will have to be
provided to assure access for maintenance.
✓ k) The Fence and Tree Placement Detail plan should be
extended to show an adequate cross-section of these
typical backyards on Seneca. Street, with the relationship
of the lot to all easements and right-of-way, sidewalk,
proposed landscaping, and the street. It would be
appropriate to include everything to the centerline of
the street.
1) /The Vicinity Map should be revised to reflect only the
First Filing as the Project Site for this request.
m) The. Drainage Easement should actually be a Drainage Tract
under COVERAGE in the Land. Use Data.
,Zh�) A general note should be added to this plan stating that
°A free permit must be obtained from the City Forester
before any trees or shrubs as noted on this plan are
planted, pruned, or removed on Public Right of Way.
/X0) The American Linden trees shown in the parkways along
Seneca Street and Regency Drive should be changed to
Honeylocust for continuity. The Honeylocust shown in the
drainage tract along Regency Drive should be changed to
Burr Oak. This is a better species for non -irrigated
areas.
p) Ornamental trees should be considered in the rear yards
as part of the two trees planted by the developer. These
may provide a lower, more dense canopy that would relate
better to the fences and soften the street side of these
fences in some instances.
q)/The street tree sizes as shown do not meet the City
requirements of a minimum of 2" caliper for standard
/ deciduous (page 4.12 of the Development Manual).
/ r)� .The SETBACKS as shown under the Land Use Data should be
ddd revised in this manner:
* A corner lot has a 20' setback requirement for
the front lot line (shortest dimension) and a 15'
setback requirement for the side lot line.
• Rear lot line setbacks should be the standard 15'
unless justification is given for the 10' as
shown.
s) The lack of plant materials along the collector street,
being Seneca street, is a concern. Landscaping should
provide canopy over the street as well as break up the
"canyon effect" created by fences along each back yard.
A combination of street trees and shrubs should be
provided along Seneca Street and Wakerobin Lane between
fences and curbs. Criteria #42 and #44 in the All
Development section of the L.D.G.S. support this comment.
�) If landscaping is to be provided in the parkways, how
will the plant materials be irrigated and maintained?
u) / The title block should reflect the fact that this is the
Final Site Plan a Landscape Plan.
r
3. General comments:
a) Water/Wastewater Department comments have been made on
red -lined prints of the Utility Plans 1 that have been
returned to the project engineer.
b) Copies of the Project Comment Sheets received from City
Engineering and Stormwater (dated 1/16=17/91) are
attached for your information.
e) Comments from Stormwater Utility on the Final Site &
Landscape Plan have not been received as of the date of
Wes' this letter. I recommend that you contact Susan Hayes at
221-6589 to discuss any concerns that may exist.
This concludes staff comments. In order to stay on schedule for the
August 26, 1991 Planning and Zoning Board hearing it is important
to meet the following deadlines:
Plan revisions are due August 7, 1991 to enable discussion of this
request at staff Final Review on August 9.
Pluis, colored renderings, 3 copies of final revisions are due
August 19, 1991.
Final documents are due August 22, 1991.
I suggest that we meet just as soon as you've had the opportunity
to read and absorb these comments. Please call me at 221-6750 to
schedule a time.
S' rely,
t It
Project Planner
xc: Jeff Couch, Parsons & Assoc.
Kerrie Ashbeck